Who does COVID-19 hurt most? Perceptions of unequal impact and political implications

Gollust, Sarah E.; Haselswerdt, Jake

doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.115825

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This suggests both the success of current messaging on issues of structural racism, and the insufficiency of public health messaging to penetrate dominant media narratives framing aspects of COVID-19 in primarily individualistic terms 68. In this way, the data presented here reflect concerns stated elsewhere about the ‘individualisation of pandemic control’ 69 70…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

‘They’ve all endorsed it…but I’m just not there:’ a qualitative exploration of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy reported by Black and Latinx individuals

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveWe sought to examine reasons for vaccine hesitancy among online communities of US-based Black and Latinx communities to understand the role of historical racism, present-day structural racism, medical mistrust and individual concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy.DesignA qualitative study using narrative and interpretive phenomenological analysis of online bulletin board focus groups.SettingBulletin boards with a focus-group-like setting in an online, private, chat-room-like environment.ParticipantsSelf-described vaccine hesitant participants from US-based Black (30) and Latinx (30) communities designed to reflect various axes of diversity within these respective communities in the US context.ResultsBulletin board discussions covered a range of topics related to COVID-19 vaccination. COVID-19 vaccine hesitant participants expressed fears about vaccine safety and doubts about vaccine efficacy. Elements of structural racism were cited in both groups as affecting populations but not playing a role in individual vaccine decisions. Historical racism was infrequently cited as a reason for vaccine hesitancy. Individualised fears and doubts about COVID-19 (short-term and long-term) safety and efficacy dominated these bulletin board discussions. Community benefits of vaccination were not commonly raised among participants.ConclusionsWhile this suggests that addressing individually focused fear and doubts are central to overcoming COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Black and Latinx groups, addressing the effects of present-day structural racism through a focus on community protection may also be important.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

‘They’ve all endorsed it…but I’m just not there:’ a qualitative exploration of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy reported by Black and Latinx individuals

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Mental Health Treatment Access: Experience, Hypotheticals, and Public Opinion

HASELSWERDT

2024

Milbank Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Policy Points Policymakers should consider both material (e.g., cost) and attitudinal (e.g., skepticism) barriers to mental health treatment access. Public support for government action on mental health is high but varies based on experience‐based and hypothetical beliefs about barriers to treatment. Appeals to personal experience and perspective‐taking may be successful in building support for government action on mental health. ContextMental health problems represent a major public health issue for the United States, and access to mental health treatment is both inadequate and unevenly distributed. There is a strong justification for government action on mental health treatment, but it is unclear whether there is a political constituency for such action. Existing work suggests that stigma and othering of people with mental illnesses contributes to reduced support for intervention. I expand on the existing literature by focusing on mental health as an issue that may apply to Americans’ own lives rather than only to a stigmatized outgroup.MethodsUsing original questions on a nationally representative 2023 survey of 1,000 American adults, I measured agreement with statements about barriers to mental health treatment access that respondents have experienced or, if they have not sought treatment, their hypothetical assessment of these barriers. I also measured their support for statements in favor of change to address mental health. I analyzed the demographic and political correlates of agreement with the barrier statements and used regressions to examine their possible causal effect on support for change.FindingsAgreement with statements about access barriers follows expected patterns in some cases (e.g., socioeconomic status) but not in others (e.g., race/ethnicity). I also documented a notable partisan and ideological divide in these experiences and beliefs. I found that Americans who agreed that material factors are a barrier to access were more supportive of action on mental health, whereas those who agreed with statements suggesting discomfort or skepticism were less supportive.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that personal experience and perspective‐taking should be integrated into the study of public opinion on mental health, complementing existing work on stigma and othering. Appeals to experience and perspective‐taking may be a successful strategy for building public support for action on mental health.

show abstract

Polarized Perspectives on Health Equity: Results from a Nationally Representative Survey on US Public Perceptions of COVID-19 Disparities in 2023

Gollust,

Gansen,

Fowler

et al. 2024

Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Republicans and Democrats responded in starkly different ways to the COVID-19 pandemic, from their attitudes in 2020 about whether the virus posed a threat to whether the pandemic ended in 2023. The consequences of COVID-19 for health equity has been a central concern in public health, and the concept of health equity has also been beset by partisan polarization. In this essay, we present and discuss nationally-representative survey data from 2023 on U.S. public perceptions of disparities in COVID-19 mortality (building on a multi-wave previous survey effort), as well as causal attributions for racial disparities, the contribution of structural racism, and broader attitudes about public health authority. We find anticipated gulfs in perspectives between Democrats on the one hand, and Independents and Republicans on the other. The results offer a somewhat pessimistic view on the likelihood of finding common ground in how the general public understands health inequities or the role of structural racism in perpetuating them. However, we show that those who acknowledge racial disparities in COVID-19 are more likely to support state public health authority to act for other infectious disease threats. We explore the implications of these public opinion data for advocacy, communication, and future needed research.

show abstract

Who does COVID-19 hurt most? Perceptions of unequal impact and political implications

Cited by 4 publications

References 39 publications

‘They’ve all endorsed it…but I’m just not there:’ a qualitative exploration of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy reported by Black and Latinx individuals

‘They’ve all endorsed it…but I’m just not there:’ a qualitative exploration of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy reported by Black and Latinx individuals

Mental Health Treatment Access: Experience, Hypotheticals, and Public Opinion

Polarized Perspectives on Health Equity: Results from a Nationally Representative Survey on US Public Perceptions of COVID-19 Disparities in 2023

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About